netdev - RE: [PATCH] flexcan: Fix CAN_RAW_RECV_OWN_MSGS and CAN_RAW

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <70F6AAAFDC054F41B9994A9BCD3DF64E16FAA803@exch01-aklnz.MARINE.NET.INT>
Date:	Thu, 3 Nov 2011 08:46:06 +1300
From:	"Reuben Dowle" <Reuben.Dowle@...ico.com>
To:	"Kurt Van Dijck" <kurt.van.dijck@....be>
Cc:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] flexcan: Fix CAN_RAW_RECV_OWN_MSGS and CAN_RAW_LOOPBACK

> >  	flexcan_write(ctrl, &regs->cantxfg[FLEXCAN_TX_BUF_ID].can_ctrl);
> >
> > -	kfree_skb(skb);
> > +	can_put_echo_skb(skb, dev, 0);
> >
> >  	/* tx_packets is incremented in flexcan_irq */
> >  	stats->tx_bytes += cf->can_dlc;
> Why not move the statistics to the place where the echo_skb is popped?
> When no frame gets out (due to whatever reason), the statistics may
> have
> incremented.
> 
> Or maybe this needs a seperate patch?
> 
> The rest looks good.
> 
> Kurt

I think you are right - incrementing the tx_bytes at this point does not seem right. It makes most sense to increment the bytes and packets at the same time when tx is confirmed by the interrupt. Looking through the various can drivers, there seems to be 2 approaches to this: at91, slcan and flexcan are incrementing tx_bytes when tx is started, and tx_packets in complete irq, whereas vcan, mcp251x, pch, hecc, softing, sja1000, c_can do it in tx complete irq.

So I think this is a slightly different issue to the one I was patching, which affects a couple of drivers. The majority of drivers seem to be doing it the way you suggest, but I am not familiar enough with the linux can layer to say one way or the other. I think if it is done how flexcan is doing it, then you would get tx_bytes always gets incremented, even when the tx is dropped due to bus off.

If we change the behaviour of flexcan, I think at91 and slcan should be changed too, because this should be handled consistently across all drivers I would think.

Reuben